E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
    
 | | 08/27/2005 2:08 PM |
| | recovered topic 7965 | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 2:08 PM |
| My thoughts...
I don't like it. It was originally included as a way to reduce the total number of magic items, as well as to add something interesting, like protecting your precious items.... both of which I like.
Unfortunately, this can cause some unbalancing as warlords advance, if one warlord keeps loosing items and another doesn't - which isn't bad in itself, but we are not able to account for it when trying to make each battle even (with support troops etc). The other problem of course is that some players don't want to destroy other players items.
So.... any ideas? | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
Richard II
Commander
3663 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 2:15 PM |
| | Ditch it. an item is yours forever and ever. | |
 | |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/27/2005 2:33 PM |
| To expedite games I vote ditch dropped items, allow swapping from one creature to another with existing rules / restrictions.
If we need to balance quantity / items, there are many other ways to do it evenly across the board. | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 2:38 PM |
| Maybe this is a stupid idea...
What about introducing something like a "Disarmament" every 3 weeks or so. During Disarmament week, every player must choose a magic item to loose based on their level (with minimums so players don't get whittled down to no items)
For example
lvl
1-3 none
4-7 lose minor
8+ lose medium
OR
Am I the only one who thinks we need to reduce the number of magic items?
Where I see the biggest problem is the high levels where two level 7 characters can be almost 3000 XP apart, and thus have a difference of like 3 Medium items.... which isn't really fair, or is it not a big deal once your that high?
| |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 2:49 PM |
| | Ditch destruction and pick up, its too complicated and weird. As for disarmament, is it necessary? do items generally swing the battle that much one way or the other? | |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
rgrayua
Sergeant
400 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 3:00 PM |
| | I don't know if magic items cause that much difference. If we went with disarmament I would think the support rules would need to be adjusted. I'm still not convinced that at the highest levels, the support troops don't favor the lower level warlord. | |
| |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 3:43 PM |
| Well "spoils of war" should be "spoils of war"
The way it stands now we are all too nice to take to or destroy each other items, when given the choice.
My suggestion would be Medium and Minor items dropped on the battlefield always go to the victor- no debate.
(unless an item picked up by a unit on the battlefield and that unit either either lives or routs with item. picking up an item replaces an attack, etc)
I would also limit the number of magic items that any warlord can bring to a match be contingent on his level,
so my 5th Level warlord can only bring 5 magic items to a match
That way you can keep as many as you can capture or win, it's just you can only bring your level to the match. This gives you alot of options.
Also I would add that captured items cannot be traded in.
that way a variety medium and minor items would be traded regulary
in the weekley back and forths
Majors stay Majors and stay with your warlord regardless
Just my 2 cents. | |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|
Darastrix Maekrix
dariustad
Warlord
6322 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 3:54 PM |
| Time for the EC outsider to comment [)]:
Since this is called the Eternal Campaign, does the concept of "spoils of war" really apply? This isn't really a "war," but more a series of skirmishes to test the battle prowess of one group against another.
Speaking alignment: When LG faces LG, can you really see a Paladin taking another Paladin's (example) weapon? No, it isn't the honourable thing, and may weaken the losing Paladin's ability to fight evil. Bad thing, won't happen.
The same applies to LE, in a way. Sure, they can steal, but it's not always wise to steal from a potential ally, even for one battle. Plus, LE understands the value of working as a unit, same as LG.
CG generally isn't know from stealing from allies or opponents, either. The cause? They're good! It isn't the nice thing to do. Sure, they'll snag loot in the RPG, but usually since the baddies attacked them and are permanently dead. That same "warlord" boss-type won't be regenerating and reappearing in a future battle.
CE is the only alignment where open theft is great! Sure, kill anyone that gets in your way. Do the most damage, take the most loot. Get drunk tonight, and do it all again tomorrow.
Looking at the alignments, I think it would be safe to say the "Spoils of War" should either be removed, or relegated to the concept of "optional rules." Honestly, I believe this is where it should be. Think of it as the beginning of the Unearthed Arcana for the Eternal Campaign. [)]
Galnew: if you'd like some help editing the phrasing of Spoils of War, I'll see what I can do, or drop me an email. | |
Trade & talk in real time on IRC! SERVER: irc.psionics.net CHANNEL: #maxminis SOFTWARE: PC | PC (free) | MAC
Champion of ALL Dragons and the Dragon Shaman
][ My Trade Shoppe ][ Vindicated Champion of Aspects of Draconic Deities
| |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/27/2005 4:58 PM |
| Also I think the current Spoils rule leaves room for interpretation. It refers to items a warlord is "in possession of" at the end of battle.
No one possesses dropped items that are still lying around at the end of battle, imho, but I suppose this is debatable. There is nothing stated in the rules that a warlord can take battlefield actions (as in picking up dropped items) after the match ends.
That means the items must be picked up during battle to become spoils, which is rarely the best move your creature can take.
I also agree with Dariustad, taking another warlord's items isn't exactly something my Sword of Heironeus is prone to doing.
I think Old Coast's idea of limiting the number of items on the warlord is not a bad one - Krawd usually totes 5+ items, a couple of which are majors. Perhaps 3 items (like a Lt.) plus one item per 3 levels or so.
Another way to transfer and try new items is by forming alliances, but no one has done that yet [?] | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
rgrayua
Sergeant
400 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 5:06 PM |
| I've tried on the alliance thing, but no one has been interested. I don't like the idea of limiting the number of magic items a warlord can have. I think any changes along these lines would have to be reflected in the support troops rule.
Aside from the risk of taking a magic item during the battle, another reason few do it (at least the reason I don't) is most of the better items are major items and we can't steal those. If my major items could be stolen, I would be more likely to flee the battle field to protect them. I also agree that while stealing magic items is perfectly acceptable to Chaotic Evil (and probably encouraged in Drow culture) I can't see a LG band stealing from another good band. | |
| |
|
Craw
Sneak
74 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 5:54 PM |
| | I would vote for 1 Magic item per level. | |
Featherfall??! Who needs featherfaaaalll. . | |
|
The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 6:38 PM |
| | Wow I hadnt seen the alliance thing. that is interesting. That could help Thoms chances of getting a +1 weapon exectioners blade.... mmmm | |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/27/2005 7:15 PM |
| | If only bladebearer hobgoblins were CG... | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
adept
Warrior
336 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 8:21 PM |
| Don't really like the rule much myself. If a person tries to take a magic item off the ground, they can 1) get an item they really want instead of rolling randomly and 2)cripple other warlords by elimanating their items even if the warlord doesnt need.
I dont think the Disarmament rule will be good either. Someone could not choose to play that one week too miss the Disarming. It can hurt warlords that dont get enough play to normally get magic items. It also encourages people to upgrade their items to major so they can be sacrificed giving an edge to those that want to hold onto a med item.
If you change the spoils rule could I also reroll my hand of the mage? | |
| |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 11:06 PM |
| Hey guys, thanks for all the suggestions.
I think limiting the number of items you can bring to a match is a good idea and will also encourage players to upgrade their items.
I think the max number of items should be Warlord Level +1 or +2
Otherwise players who lose their first match or two, will have one or two minor items, and not be able to bring any to use! (since they are level 0)
There also seems to be a consesus that the current rule should be scrapped. I can go with that.
| |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/27/2005 11:38 PM |
| If warlords are limited to fewer than 3 magic items, Lts. will have to be even more restricted.
How about a table reflecting
WARLORD# = 3+level/2 (minimum = 3 for new warlord, 4 at level 2, 8 by level 10)
LT# = 2+level/3 (more restrictive than current rule until level 3, less restrictive on the outside chance a Lt. achieves level 6 or more)
LEVEL WARLORD# LT#
0..............3..............2
1..............3..............2
2..............4..............2
3..............4..............3
4..............5..............3
5..............5..............3
6..............6..............4
7..............6..............4
8..............7..............4
9..............7..............5
10............8..............5
[Numbers in columns 2 and 3 are max # of magic items allowed] | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/27/2005 11:48 PM |
| I was thinking we'd keep the current item restrictions (3/lt, all/warlord, 1/others)
It would be the TOTAL # of items that could be brought to the match that would be limited. | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/28/2005 1:20 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by galneweinhaw
I was thinking we'd keep the current item restrictions (3/lt, all/warlord, 1/others)
It would be the TOTAL # of items that could be brought to the match that would be limited.
Aha that works. Promotes trade-in / trade-up. | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
Darastrix Maekrix
dariustad
Warlord
6322 Posts
| | 08/28/2005 4:26 AM |
| Makes one wonder what would happen if there was someone that acted like that kid in Tristram back in Diablo (game from Blizzard Entertainment). You give him 50,000 gold and he drops a random magic item on you.
It'd be funny if someone showed up randomly and traded an item for another of the same power level.
Hey, it's a silly idea, but it could be interesting. [)] | |
Trade & talk in real time on IRC! SERVER: irc.psionics.net CHANNEL: #maxminis SOFTWARE: PC | PC (free) | MAC
Champion of ALL Dragons and the Dragon Shaman
][ My Trade Shoppe ][ Vindicated Champion of Aspects of Draconic Deities
| |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/28/2005 1:20 PM |
| | Wert, the boy with the wooden leg | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
Veliq
Warrior
300 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 8:30 AM |
| | Since I'm just joining I really have no experience with this rule, but my impression when reading was that I, too, didn't like it much. I would prefer to remove this ruling all together. As far as there being too many magic items out there for the higher level units, I heard someone saying this week that they felt the support was overpowered. Apparently, he didn't have enough magic items [)] | |
| |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 12:29 PM |
| Gal,
I think your current proposal
quote:
1. Scrap Spoils of War rule completely (see above)
2. Introduce maximum number of magic items to be braught to a match = Warlord Level +1.
is cool.
The only thing I would like to see some sort of spoils of war rule
as think the losing and capturing of magic items is a cool feature it's just it needs to simplified to where the current issues are fixed.
| |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 12:30 PM |
| Well, it looks like we've come to an agreement. This will take place starting next week and will be notes in the weekly updates section of the post.
The change will be:
1. Scrap Spoils of War rule completely (see above)
2. Introduce maximum number of magic items to be brought to a match = Warlord Level +1.
I'm going to start the next discussion.... on Transferable magic items.
| |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 2:22 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by oldcoast
The only thing I would like to see some sort of spoils of war rule as think the losing and capturing of magic items is a cool feature it's just it needs to simplified to where the current issues are fixed.
The problem is we haven't been able to comeup with a better replacement.... any suggestions? | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 2:25 PM |
| Stream lined version:
The winner of a match may choose to take the spoils of war by taking a medium item from the loser. If the spoils of war are not taken the winner may roll normally for a medium or trade up for a major as per normal rules.
| |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 2:28 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by AesophDarkfable
Stream lined version:
The winner of a match may choose to take the spoils of war by taking a medium item from the loser. If the spoils of war are not taken the winner may roll normally for a medium or trade up for a major as per normal rules.
Does the loser get a replacement item? If not I think this would be too damaging for the losers, they should be advancing as well...just more slowly than the winners, and should definitely not be going backwards, I think =) | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 2:38 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by galneweinhaw
quote:
Originally posted by AesophDarkfable
Stream lined version:
The winner of a match may choose to take the spoils of war by taking a medium item from the loser. If the spoils of war are not taken the winner may roll normally for a medium or trade up for a major as per normal rules.
Does the loser get a replacement item? If not I think this would be too damaging for the losers, they should be advancing as well...just more slowly than the winners, and should definitely not be going backwards, I think =)
They would get to roll as normal (for a new minor or trade a minor for a medium)
Sorry guess that should have been on there | |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 3:08 PM |
| Unfortunately this has one of the main problems the current rule does, and that's that it comes down to whether your opponent wants to take/destroy an item or not.
Players with similar win/lose records should be as equal as possible and I think this introduces an unessecary variation. | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 3:39 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by galneweinhaw
The problem is we haven't been able to comeup with a better replacement.... any suggestions?
My suggestion is that dropped items left on the battlefield automatically go to the victor. This gives you incentive to pick up dropped items (which there isn't much of as it stands) and also makes you think a bit harder about retreating sooner. so instead of slugging it out to the bitter end. The better move might be to grab that valuable magic item your dead commander dropped and make your way to the exit grid. This might actually speed games up bit, because automatically losing dropped item will players an incentive to protect them and dictate a strategic retreat. This also removes the issue of us all being too nice to take each others items as its automatic. | |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|
E.C. Organizer
galneweinhaw
Commander
2646 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 3:58 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by oldcoast
My suggestion is that dropped items left on the battlefield automatically go to the victor. This gives you incentive to pick up dropped items (which there isn't much of as it stands) and also makes you think a bit harder about retreating sooner. so instead of slugging it out to the bitter end. The better move might be to grab that valuable magic item your dead commander dropped and make your way to the exit grid. This might actually speed games up bit, because automatically losing dropped item will players an incentive to protect them and dictate a strategic retreat. This also removes the issue of us all being too nice to take each others items as its automatic.
I wish we could do this, but it's just too harsh. If your 6th level warlord gets slaughtered cus you have a bad game... you'll lose all your magic items, then your warlord has no chance of competing anymore... | |
Join the Eternal Skirmish Campaign.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. ~Dr Seuss | |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 4:17 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by galneweinhaw
I wish we could do this, but it's just too harsh. If your 6th level warlord gets slaughtered cus you have a bad game... you'll lose all your magic items, then your warlord has no chance of competing anymore...
Well it doesn't effect majors. And at higher levels like 6th warlords seem to have alot of major items. item limits will control what you and how much you bring as well.
(high level warlord in a big game against a feared opponent, only bring majors, etc)
Example my 5th Warlord has 3 majors which are safe
and 2 mediums. If I got totally wiped out where I lost both mediums
I would certain make an effort to pick them up and get the hell off the battlefield ASAP instead of holding out prolonging the game hoping for a lucky critical.
Even if I lost them both I would still get minor. Doesn't seem like that huge of a deal in long run and adaquate penalty for taking a stiff beating.
I see a potential in case like my retired Warlord Odge who was cursed and went 2-14 or something .like that, he could have probably went with never having any magic items as much as he lost , however if the rules where like I suggest, I would have played many games a whole lot differently.
I also think is a good trade off for that fact the normal tourney game limited to 1 hour, while high point vassal games can go up to 5 hours. if you concede you wouldn't lose any magic items you're holding. Think of this as way to speed games up by forcing a change in game strategy.
It's just an idea, If you guys don't like it that's cool, I just thought i'd throw it out there.
I definitely don't want to alienate new Vassal players with extra harsh rules.
| |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|
Darastrix Maekrix
dariustad
Warlord
6322 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 5:01 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by oldcoast
quote:
Originally posted by galneweinhaw
I wish we could do this, but it's just too harsh. If your 6th level warlord gets slaughtered cus you have a bad game... you'll lose all your magic items, then your warlord has no chance of competing anymore...
Well it doesn't effect majors. And at higher levels like 6th warlords seem to have alot of major items. item limits will control what you and how much you bring as well.
(high level warlord in a big game against a feared opponent, only bring majors, etc)
Example my 5th Warlord has 3 majors which are safe
and 2 mediums. If I got totally wiped out where I lost both mediums
I would certain make an effort to pick them up and get the hell off the battlefield ASAP instead of holding out prolonging the game hoping for a lucky critical.
Doesn't this basically alter the whole concept of skirmishing? Making the items more important than the game? "Screw the win, save the sword!" This feels more like Monty Haul, not "Atlantia Death Squadron, attack!"
quote:
Even if I lost them both I would still get minor. Doesn't seem like that huge of a deal in long run and adaquate penalty for taking a stiff beating.
Yeah, well, I've watched enough matches to see how protective people are of mediums -- even crappy mediums. That's trade fodder for a major! How many of you want to lose two medium items? What if you were holding onto those to trade them in for major items? Your warlord just took a serious hit, since items are important in EC.
quote:
I see a potential in case like my retired Warlord Odge who was cursed and went 2-14 or something .like that, he could have probably went with never having any magic items as much as he lost , however if the rules where like I suggest, I would have played many games a whole lot differently.
I also think is a good trade off for that fact the normal tourney game limited to 1 hour, while high point vassal games can go up to 5 hours. if you concede you wouldn't lose any magic items you're holding. Think of this as way to speed games up by forcing a change in game strategy.
It's just an idea, If you guys don't like it that's cool, I just thought i'd throw it out there.
I definitely don't want to alienate new Vassal players with extra harsh rules.
The are not harsh rules, but they will affect the entire Meta of the EC. This kind of change makes the items the most important thing in the game, not the skirmish. Without the skirmish, you have no reason to really be there. AFAIK, the items are meant to enhance the skirmish game, not become the focus.
-DT, the EC Outsider [}:)] | |
Trade & talk in real time on IRC! SERVER: irc.psionics.net CHANNEL: #maxminis SOFTWARE: PC | PC (free) | MAC
Champion of ALL Dragons and the Dragon Shaman
][ My Trade Shoppe ][ Vindicated Champion of Aspects of Draconic Deities
| |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 5:34 PM |
| Darius,
The Campaign is totally different from Standard Skirmish and meta thinking isn't really applicable when the high level warlords would crush any tier 1 meta-figure in a 1 vs 1.
Basically I am just looking for a way for more magic items to get shuffled around and maybe shorten some of the games. As it stands Warlords are gaining too many magic items, and you have zero risk of losing anything. Being that is a "Campaign" with supposed "Spoils of War" it would be nice if it worked. We've agree to item limits which is good, now it would be great if we could get some sort of "spoils of war"
Another idea
How about the Loser must concede one dropped item (of winners choice) to the Winner after each match. Kind of like when a losing commander would surrender his sword to his opponent to accepting defeat. And the winner still gets his medium item ( you trade conceded items until the following week)
at least that some kind of "Spoils of War", right now we have nothing.
If you have any ideas please share.
and join the campaign already, as it's obvious you're interested
[)] | |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/30/2005 6:21 PM |
| Winner takes all med and minor i see as a way to redistribute most items to a few really powerful dudes. Imagine Krawd just won 4 times in a row, winning +2 med items per battle, now with trade ins he's at +4 major items. The opponent gets no more support points or warband points, and now this dude comes along with 4 extra major items - UH OH! Tends to unbalance EC-world, and a few wins creates momentum to get more wins and more items.
The idea of single item surrender is not a bad one, except that again a warlord does not always have a med or minor to surrender, then someone gets stiffed. If we have too many items, then let's balance out the rate of getting items.
For overall balance, passing extra items to a winning warlord seems counter-intuitive.
Another option for item control and reduction: Open a "store" - each warlord may trade in once a week. For 3 times the normal trade-in value, you can choose the item you want from the list (i.e. trade in 3 mediums for the exact medium you want). Kind of like bartering in town and the seller KNOWS you just gotta have the item, so he gouges you for it. | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
jjbeezer
Sergeant
633 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 6:52 PM |
| I have not seen an item picked up and destroyed in one of my games. In Clank's first battle he was level 2. Clank was beaten soundly and my opponent captured my Frost Weapon. That cut Clank's item selection in half. It really hurt (I really liked that weapon).
Stealing items early in a warlord's career could be devistating. Once warlords get stronger, losing a medium hurts, but not that bad. It is not half of your magic items.
One suggestion might be to take the loser's medium or minor items that were left on the ground or picked up by the winning warlord. This list of items would be elegible for being claimed by the victor. However, like in the regular campaign rules, there is only a 1/4 chance (16+ roll) that the winner can choose one of the items. It would be the only item that they recieved for the week. No items would be destroyed. If the winner did not want one of the loser's items they could just roll regularly. If they did want one of the items, but their 16+ roll failed, they could still roll for a regular medium item.
Not a simple solution. However, it would give a larger selection of items to steal since there would be no pick up requirement.
Any way we go I will keep playing. | |
| |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/30/2005 9:06 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Zippy
Winner takes all med and minor i see as a way to redistribute most items to a few really powerful dudes. Imagine Krawd just won 4 times in a row, winning +2 med items per battle, now with trade ins he's at +4 major items. The opponent gets no more support points or warband points, and now this dude comes along with 4 extra major items - UH OH! Tends to unbalance EC-world, and a few wins creates momentum to get more wins and more items.
Figures Krawd blows the curve [)]
seriously, you're right I wasn't thinking about it that way
quote:
The idea of single item surrender is not a bad one, except that again a warlord does not always have a med or minor to surrender, then someone gets stiffed. If we have too many items, then let's balance out the rate of getting items.
I am liking this idea currently, You would only get the option to surrender dropped items, if an Item isnt dropped or your opponent doesn't have an item to drop. yeah you get stiffed, but you'd still get your victory item. This idea is an easy "no-brainer" - for spoils of war rule
quote:
For overall balance, passing extra items to a winning warlord seems counter-intuitive.
don't the new item limits cover this? sure you can have boatload of items you just cant bring more that your level +1 to the match
quote:
Another option for item control and reduction: Open a "store" - each warlord may trade in once a week. For 3 times the normal trade-in value, you can choose the item you want from the list (i.e. trade in 3 mediums for the exact medium you want). Kind of like bartering in town and the seller KNOWS you just gotta have the item, so he gouges you for it.
the only problem with this winning warlords will all end up with the same items, the only "balance" that exists is the randomness of item aquisition. | |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|
Zippy
Underboss
1993 Posts
Whitewater, WI
| | 08/30/2005 11:34 PM |
| the only problem with this winning warlords will all end up with the same items, the only "balance" that exists is the randomness of item aquisition.
Yes that's a very fair point. Each warlord would pick the particular item or tiems that totally exploit their band building options. | |
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reference Thread, H/W List, Champion of the Catoblepas | |
|
Darastrix Maekrix
dariustad
Warlord
6322 Posts
| | 08/31/2005 1:20 AM |
| | See? The EC shouldn't be just about the items! But nooooooo.... I don't know what I'm talking about. [:P] | |
Trade & talk in real time on IRC! SERVER: irc.psionics.net CHANNEL: #maxminis SOFTWARE: PC | PC (free) | MAC
Champion of ALL Dragons and the Dragon Shaman
][ My Trade Shoppe ][ Vindicated Champion of Aspects of Draconic Deities
| |
|
oldcoast
Sergeant
394 Posts
| | 08/31/2005 2:38 AM |
| | Don't worry Darius, your still our favorite interloper [:)] | |
Check out The Old Coast my online Greyhawk campaign featuring all maxmini's members!, and.........Champion of Aspect of Zuggtmoy | |
|